Instant compatibility check with FPS benchmarks and optimization tips
Microsoft Flight Simulator
Performance
1080p (Full HD)
1440p (2K / QHD)
4K (Ultra HD)
Requirements Check
Recommendations
Your hardware doesn't meet minimum requirements for this game.
Average FPS: resolution vs quality settings
| Ultra | High | Medium | Low | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4K Ultra HD | 34 | 35 | 41 | 58 |
| 1440p QHD | 44 | 45 | 63 | 80 |
| 1080p Full HD | 53 | 53 | 75 | 96 |
Cell color: green is 120+ FPS, teal is 60+, amber is 30+, red is below 30. Cards marked Estimated above have no measured row and are scaled from your GPU benchmark percentile.
Performance Analysis: Microsoft Flight Simulator on Your System
The AMD Ryzen 5 5600GT and Intel Arc B580 form a mid-range desktop pairing that targets 1080p and 1440p gaming. For Microsoft Flight Simulator, measured data shows this combo can hold 60 FPS at 1920x1080 and 2560x1440 on Medium settings, but it falls short at 3840x2160 on every preset. The CPU has a launch MSRP of $140 and the GPU a launch MSRP of 249 USD. This analysis breaks down the exact frame rates, compares the hardware to near-identical rivals, and examines what the scaling patterns reveal about the workload.
Measured FPS Breakdown
The following table lists average frame rates recorded for each resolution and preset. Minimum and maximum FPS values were not reported, so only averages are available.
| Resolution | Settings | Avg FPS |
|------------|----------|---------|
| 3840x2160 | High | 35 |
| 3840x2160 | Low | 57.8 |
| 3840x2160 | Medium | 41.4 |
| 3840x2160 | Ultra | 33.5 |
| 2560x1440 | High | 44.7 |
| 2560x1440 | Low | 79.5 |
| 2560x1440 | Medium | 62.9 |
| 2560x1440 | Ultra | 43.7 |
| 1920x1080 | High | 53.4 |
| 1920x1080 | Low | 96.3 |
| 1920x1080 | Medium | 74.9 |
| 1920x1080 | Ultra | 52.6 |
At 1920x1080, Low and Medium exceed the 60 FPS playability threshold, while High and Ultra dip below. The jump from Low to Medium costs roughly 21 FPS, but the drop from Medium to High is even steeper, and High to Ultra barely changes (53.4 vs 52.6). This suggests that the Ultra preset adds little extra load over High at this resolution, or that a different bottleneck emerges. At 2560x1440, the same pattern holds: Low and Medium are playable, High and Ultra are not. The gap between Low and Medium narrows to about 16 FPS, and High to Ultra remains small (44.7 vs 43.7). At 3840x2160, no preset reaches 60 FPS. Low comes closest at 57.8, followed by Medium at 41.4, High at 35, and Ultra at 33.5. The scaling is consistent with a GPU-bound workload, as frame rates drop sharply with each step up in resolution.
Similar Performance Alternatives
The CPU's average benchmark score is 20733, placing it within 0.5% of several other processors. Its nearest rivals are the Intel Core i5-12490F (20802, -0.3%), Intel Xeon 6325P (20821, -0.4%), Intel Core Ultra 5 125U (20826, -0.4%), and AMD EPYC 7J13 (20845, -0.5%). Any of these CPUs would deliver nearly identical CPU-bound performance in this simulator, so users with those parts can expect the same frame rates at low and medium settings.
The GPU's average benchmark score is 23021, and its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP (23061, -0.2%), NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (22895, +0.6%), NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 (23172, -0.7%), and NVIDIA P106-100 (23249, -1%). The Arc B580 sits within about 1% of these cards, meaning a swap to any of them would produce very similar results in this game. The CPU's percentile rank among all CPUs is 74, while the GPU's is 68, indicating that the CPU is relatively stronger than the GPU in this pairing.
CPU and GPU Roles
The measured FPS scaling across resolutions and presets points to the GPU as the primary limiter. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo reaches 96.3 FPS, well above the 60 FPS threshold. At 2560x1440 Low, it drops to 79.5 FPS, and at 3840x2160 Low, it falls to 57.8 FPS. This consistent decline as pixel count increases is typical of a GPU-bound scenario; if the CPU were the bottleneck, the frame rate would not drop as sharply with resolution.
The impact of settings also highlights GPU stress. At 1920x1080, Low yields 96.3 FPS, Medium 74.9, High 53.4, and Ultra 52.6. At 2560x1440, the progression is 79.5, 62.9, 44.7, and 43.7. At 3840x2160, it is 57.8, 41.4, 35, and 33.5. The gap between Low and Ultra is substantial at every resolution, and even the lowest preset at 4K cannot sustain 60 FPS. The CPU's single-thread performance appears sufficient for this simulator; its 3DMark single-thread score is 913 and its Cinebench R23 single-core score is 2438. The CPU's overall benchmark percentile (74) is higher than the GPU's (68), reinforcing the idea that the GPU is the more limiting component in this pairing.
FAQ
Q: Can this combo run Microsoft Flight Simulator at 4K?
A: No. The highest average FPS at 3840x2160 is 57.8 on Low settings, which is below the 60 FPS playable threshold.
Q: What is the best playable setting at 1920x1080?
A: Medium, which produces 74.9 FPS on average. Low also exceeds 60 FPS (96.3), but Medium offers higher visual quality while still staying above 60.
Q: What about 2560x1440?
A: Medium is the best playable preset there as well, with an average of 62.9 FPS. Low gives 79.5 FPS, but Medium is the highest setting that remains above 60.
Q: Is Ultra ever playable?
A: No. At all three resolutions, Ultra stays below 60 FPS: 52.6 at 1080p, 43.7 at 1440p, and 33.5 at 4K.
Q: How does this hardware compare to its nearest rivals?
A: The CPU is within 0.5% of the Intel Core i5-12490F, Xeon 6325P, Core Ultra 5 125U, and EPYC 7J13. The GPU is within 1% of the Radeon RX 580 2048SP, GeForce RTX 2080, RTX 3080, and P106-100.
Q: What is the combo's overall rank in the database?
A: It ranks 2822 out of 3714 tested combos.
Best Settings per Resolution
At 3840x2160, no setting reaches the 60 FPS threshold. The closest is Low at 57.8 FPS, but that still fails the playability criterion. At 2560x1440, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Medium, with an average of 62.9 FPS. Low also qualifies at 79.5 FPS, but Medium is the highest playable quality. At 1920x1080, Medium again is the best playable setting, delivering 74.9 FPS. Low yields 96.3 FPS, but Medium provides a better visual experience while remaining above 60.
How This Combo Ranks
The combination of the Ryzen 5 5600GT and Arc B580 is ranked 2822 out of 3714 tested combos for Microsoft Flight Simulator. That places it in the lower portion of the database, meaning a majority of tested systems deliver higher frame rates. The GPU's 68th percentile and CPU's 74th percentile suggest that while the CPU is relatively stronger, the overall combo is not competitive with top-tier configurations. The measured frame rates confirm this: the system is only comfortably playable at 1080p and 1440p on Medium, and not at 4K.
The Verdict
Yes, this PC can run Microsoft Flight Simulator, but with clear limitations. At 1920x1080, it achieves playable frame rates on Low (96.3 FPS) and Medium (74.9 FPS), with High and Ultra falling below 60. At 2560x1440, Low (79.5) and Medium (62.9) are playable, while High and Ultra are not. At 3840x2160, no preset reaches 60 FPS; the best is Low at 57.8 FPS. Therefore, the recommended configuration is Medium at 1080p or 1440p for a smooth experience. The data indicates that the GPU is the primary bottleneck, especially at higher resolutions, and that the CPU has enough headroom to support the Arc B580 at lower settings.